GENEVA.--THE CONFESSION OF FAITH SWORN AT ST. PETER’S.
(END OF 1537.)
[Sidenote: GENEVA.]
It was not only in his relations with those Christian men, Megander and
Bucer, or with the wretched Caroli, that Calvin’s efforts were crowned
with success. Happy presages seemed to announce to him a blessed and
powerful ministry at Geneva. His reformation, as we have seen, was
not only doctrinal but moral, a fact of the highest importance for
the Church and for the people. But, as happens in all human affairs,
a few spots sullied this beautiful aspect of his work. Rules were
introduced which were too circumstantial, and a mode of repression
which was too legal. Calvin found at the time a sympathy on the part of
the magistrates which was pleasant to him, but which at the same time
intruded the civil power into matters for which the moral influence of
the Church ought to have sufficed. All his requests were complied with.
He asked, together with Farel, for four preachers and two deacons, and
they were granted. He represented that there was a preacher, a good
man from Provence, who would fain retire to Geneva; and they gave him
a place.[537] One of the most violent politicians, Janin, surnamed
Colony, a great lover of novelties, after ardently embracing the
Reformation, had thrown himself with his natural impetuosity into the
notions of the _Spirituals_ or Anabaptists, and was uttering everywhere
audacious speeches on matters of faith. The council requested him
‘not to grieve the preachers,’ and added grave menaces in case he
should refuse to be corrected.[538] Another citizen, a hosier, who
was suspected of holding the same views, having been exhorted by the
pastors and the magistrates, declared that his doubts about baptism had
vanished, and took an oath, says the Register, ‘to live as we do.’[539]
On October 5, Farel and Calvin announced that they would administer the
supper, but ‘that there were some who kept aloof, holding the opinions
of Benoît and Herman; and others who still kept their beads, which are
implements of idolatry.’ Thereupon the council determined ‘to take away
all the beads.’ That was far easier than to take away the faith of
which the beads were a sign.
[Sidenote: PARTIES AT GENEVA.]
Nothing could check the zeal of Calvin. On October 30 he presented
himself to the council, and set forth various grievances. ‘The
hospital,’ he said, ‘is very poorly furnished, and the sick are
suffering in consequence. Geneva has a Christian school, and
nevertheless some children go to the school of the papacy. Lastly it
is to be feared that dissensions will arise between the citizens, for
while some have taken the oath as to the manner of living, others have
not done so.’ The sick, the young, and peace among the citizens, these
were the matters which occupied the mind of the reformer, subjects well
worthy of his attention. The council decreed--‘The hospital shall be
supplied; all children shall be bound to go to the Christian school,
and not to the papistical; and the confession shall be required of all
who have not yet made it.’ This last point must inevitably be the most
difficult. A conflict was about to begin, and what would be its result?
We have just seen that there were in Geneva two parties, more or less
considerable, who set themselves in opposition to the evangelical
Reformation--the Roman Catholics and the Spirituals or Anabaptists.
But there was yet a third party, more respectable and therefore more
formidable. The Genevese people were naturally restless, and delighted
in freedom and in pleasure. At first they had warmly embraced the
Reformation, merely thinking that they should thereby be delivered from
their bishop and from the practices which they disliked. But as soon as
the Reformation demanded a Christian faith and life, the ardor of the
Genevese rapidly diminished. The severity of Calvin and his colleagues
chilled the violent ebullition of their zeal. They felt the ordinances
imposed on them to be troublesome and exorbitant. Moreover, it was not
only the jolly fellows, the lovers of pleasure and the libertines as
they are called, who were refractory. It would be a great mistake not
to acknowledge that in the ranks of the opposition there were other
motives and other men.
We have already related the heroic struggles which had restored to
Geneva her freedom and her independence.[540] We did so, less on
account of their intrinsic interest than because they exercised a
powerful influence, whether for good or for evil, on the Reformation.
We have seen how political emancipation permitted and was favorable to
religious emancipation. We have now to observe the obstacles raised
up by those who, while they rejected popery, did not embrace the
Gospel. The Huguenots (that is, as our readers will recollect, the
name which was given to the partisans of the alliance with the Swiss
Confederation) were divided after Calvin’s arrival. Some of them were
friendly to and supported the Reformation; others pronounced themselves
against him, and opposed his work. The opposition did not consist
merely of men of the lowest rank, vulgar and dissolute. There were on
both sides, in the great national party, some generous characters,
some honorable citizens. Unfortunately, as the State and the Church
were at that time not only united but blended with each other, these
two parties were at the same time both right and wrong. The political
Huguenots were right with respect to the State, and in error respecting
the Church; and the evangelical Christians were right with respect
to the Church, and in error with respect to the State. To make the
confusion greater still, the true principles of Church and State were
at that period very little understood. Many of the eminent citizens
who had exposed themselves to famine, pillage, and death for the sake
of being free, who had resolved not to have for their master either
their bishop, or the Duke of Savoy, or the King of France, or even
Berne; who had marched in the van for the political emancipation of
Geneva; now asserted their right to enjoy in peace the liberty for
which they had so long fought. We have admired them in their heroical
struggles. We will not brand them in this new opposition. Politically
they were right. In a certain sense they were also right religiously.
The religion of Jesus Christ will not be imposed by force, and it
rejects all compulsion. In the attempt to establish itself in any town,
it refuses alike the intervention of the martyr-fires of the Holy
Office and the decrees of a council of state. Jesus Christ said, _Wilt
thou be made whole?_ This is not the place for an inquiry into the
aids which this will of man receives from on high: we hold simply to
the declarations of the Saviour, and we say that man ought to feel the
want of the Gospel, and if he does not want it, no one has any right
to impose it on him. To act as the syndics then did was to ignore the
divine spirituality of the kingdom of God, and to make of it a human
institution. Another motive may possibly have contributed to arouse
opposition. Farel, Calvin, Courault, Saunier, Froment, and Mathurin
Cordier were foreigners, Frenchmen. They had drawn around them their
brothers, their cousins, and some of their friends. These foreigners
appeared to be taking the upper hand in Geneva, and this hurt the
feelings of the old citizens. They wished that Geneva should belong to
the Genevese, as France did to the French and Germany to the Germans.
[Sidenote: FAITH BY COMPULSION.]
Calvin having pointed out to the council, October 30, the danger to
which the republic was exposed by the existence within it of two
opposing parties, it was decreed that those citizens who had abstained,
on July 29, from swearing to the evangelical confession, should be
called upon to do so without delay; and November 12 was appointed for
that purpose. Calvin, Farel, and their friends, who assuredly knew the
worth of a voluntary adhesion, did what they could to induce opponents
to receive the Gospel with all their heart, and not to separate
themselves from their fellow-citizens in a matter of such moment. They
urged them with kindness to listen to the good tidings of salvation,
and affectionately exhorted them to peace and union.[541] There were
indeed some vexatious proceedings. A tithing man (_dizenier_) having
in his district two young lads who refused obstinately to answer to
the summons, gave them legal notice of the order of the council, and
cited them to obey it. Thereupon these two opponents flew into a rage
and assaulted him, and for this they were imprisoned. But this was the
only case of the kind. Kindliness, however, had little more effect than
violence. In vain mild persuasion flowed from the lips of the ministers
and their friends; it repelled instead of attracting.
At length November 12 arrived. Each tithing man having called together
those of his quarter who had not yet taken the oath, they were
conducted to St. Peter’s in groups, tithing by tithing. The looks of
the people were fixed on these late comers. They were counted, but the
whole number was not large. Many did not come at all; ‘and likewise,
of those who lived in the Rue des Allemands, not one came.’[542] This
was a blow for the friends of the Reformation. The Rue des Allemands
(of the German Swiss) was chiefly inhabited by those who had early
declared themselves for liberty, and afterwards for the Reformation,
and who had adhered to the Helvetic confessions. When the Genevese
Catholics, March 28, 1533, had attacked this party by force of arms, it
was in the Rue des Allemands that the reformed were drawn up in order
of battle, five in a row. It was there that the most pious had said,
‘There is not one single drop of comfort assured to us except in God
alone.’ It was there that all had exclaimed, ‘Rather die than give way
a single step.’[543] And now, of all those who inhabited that street,
not a single man came! Doubtless some of them had already sworn to
the confession. But there were probably some also who objected to the
doctrine, and others who, like Desclefs, felt the divine commandments
too hard for them to pledge themselves to keep them. But what chiefly
repelled these Huguenots was the fact that an act was commanded which
they knew they were free to do or not to do. They were determined not
to bend under that yoke. After having dared all kinds of hardship for
the sake of winning their freedom, they did not intend that, when they
had gained it in the state, it should be snatched away from them in the
Church. They were more in the right perhaps than they imagined; for it
is hardly likely that they fully understood this great principle, ‘The
power of the magistrate ends at the point at which that of conscience
begins.’ The difficulty was still more increased by the circumstance
that ‘those who had refused to swear to the confession, whether
Catholics or Huguenots, were among the most influential persons in the
city.’ Such is the testimony of Rozet, the secretary of state, who is
assuredly a witness above suspicion. But the syndics and their council
were no more disposed to give way than their adversaries. They thought
that they had as much right to impose that act as to order a military
review. On the same day the council decreed ‘that those who will not
take the oath to the Reformation must go and dwell in some other place,
where they may live according to their fancy.’ Two days later the Two
Hundred confirmed the decree, expressing themselves somewhat bluntly,
‘that they must quit the city, since they will not obey.’[544] The
bow was tightly bent, and no one was willing to unbend it. The crisis
became more violent; a shock and a catastrophe were inevitable. The
only question was, who would be the victims.
[Sidenote: OPPONENTS OF COMPULSION.]
The citizens thus lightly banished from their native land by the
council could hardly believe their own ears. What! they had delivered
Geneva, ‘and will Geneva drive them away?’ Is it resolved that they
must forsake their homes, their families, their friends, to go and
eat the bread of the stranger? They murmured aloud and stoutly stood
out against this strange edict, confident in their strength and their
number. ‘There was no obedience at all;’ no one thought of packing
up. ‘The hostile band was of such a character that the lords dared
not execute their own decree.’ Complaints and threats grew louder
from day to day. The most influential men exclaimed--‘The present
syndics were elected by means of underhand dealings and intrigues.
They have violated our franchises and made an attack on our liberties.
There are three or four among them who do just as they will with the
ordinary council, and even with the great council. We must take the
government of the republic out of the hands of these two councils, and
henceforth everything must be managed by a general council. These
gentlemen want to reign over us as princes; but it is the people, it
is we ourselves, who are princes.’ These powerful malcontents, among
whom De Chapeaurouge distinguished himself, sought even to gain over
those of their friends who had already taken the oath, and addressed to
them the most vehement reproaches. Many of the latter were shaken, and
sought to excuse themselves. They laid the blame on the secretary of
the town. They reprimanded him (_l’impropéraient_) and blamed him for
getting them to swear without knowing what they were doing. Some even
of those who had sworn ‘adhered to the rebels.’ All these malcontents
excited one another more and more, and they thought of nothing but of
securing for themselves at the next election the place of the syndics.
The authoritative act of the council was to bring about the revolution.
Ambassadors of Berne were at Geneva at the time on some question of
jurisdiction, and the opposition party endeavored to gain them over
to their cause. This was not difficult. Calvin and Farel had adhered
to the confession of Basel, which was likewise received at Berne. Now
adherence to another confession was in their eyes a violation of the
first oath. One day, at an entertainment at which the Bernese deputies
were present with the magistrates and the notabilities of Geneva, one
of the ambassadors said with a loud voice that all those who had taken
the oath to the confession of Calvin and Farel were perjured persons.
One of the leaders of the opposition, Jean Lullin, who was there, was
delighted to hear it and did not fail to publish the rash remark. It
seemed to be a giving up of the cause to the opposition, which, proud
of finding the Bernese on its side, believed its victory secured. The
people began to be restless; and many, whom the council registers
call _the mutineers_ cried out in the streets that ‘everything was to
be settled in a general council.’ These signs of resistance greatly
afflicted the reformers and, says a chronicler, ‘put Calvin about
(_pourmenait_) in a strange way.’ Within the walls of Geneva the
agitation increased. The day grew dark, and a storm appeared ready to
burst forth.[545]
[Sidenote: THE GENERAL COUNCIL.]
The council was deeply moved. Its members were accused of having
obtained their seats by illegal practices, and appeal was made to the
people. It seemed indeed as if it would be needful for the general
council to decide between them and their adversaries. The syndics
therefore, on November 23, convoked the Two Hundred to deliberate on
the matter. The latter showed themselves determined to support the
government. The magistrates in office must not think of resigning,
they said, nor attach so much importance to these clamors. ‘All this
noise is made by certain people who have no mind to amend their
ways and who want to take the place of the syndics.’ Nevertheless,
everyone perceived that it was impossible to refuse the convocation
of a general council. It was necessary, besides, to name a deputation
to Berne to treat of important business. The day fixed was Sunday,
November 25. It was agreed to prepare some fair ordinances to be read
to the assembled people. The opposition were aiming at getting rid not
only of the magistrates but of the reformers. What took place in the
council is therefore of great importance. It was the beginning of the
counter-reformation.
On the day appointed, the Two Hundred, in order to impart more
solemnity to their proceedings, assembled at the Town Hall and thence
accompanied the syndics and the council to St. Peter’s church. These
magistrates felt keenly the accusations which were spread abroad
against them by the opposition; and having a good conscience they
wished the people to decide between them and their calumniators.
Consequently, when the assembly had been formed, the following
_remonstrance_ was addressed to the people in the name of the syndics
and the councils.
‘Magnificent, discreet, most dear and honored lords,--
‘The lords syndics whom you have elected according to your custom, as
likewise their ordinary council, that of the Sixty and that of the Two
Hundred, feel hurt by the talk of some private persons, who speak as if
they had charge of the general council, alleging that the said councils
were elected by intrigues and have violated the franchises; that it
is they (the opponents) who are princes, and that they wish that for
the future everything should be transacted in a general council. The
syndics and councils desire to learn from you, gentlemen, before they
proceed further in the investigation of the matter, whether you allow
that. You know whether or not your magistrates were elected by the
intrigues of three or four citizens, as they are alleged to have been.
You know that the four syndics were chosen by you in general council;
and while in time past the ordinary council was chosen by the four
syndics, this election, since 1530, has been made by the Council of the
Two Hundred.
[Sidenote: PROCEEDINGS AT THE COUNCIL.]
‘Elected thus, the councils ask you whether you will not acknowledge
them as your magistrates, that they may continue to exercise the power
which God has given them by your general election. They are prepared
to submit to punishment with all legal rigor, if it be found that they
are in fault; but if it be otherwise, they demand that those who defame
them should suffer chastisement, so that God may not be angry with us,
nor take away the spiritual lordship and liberty which he has given us
by his Son Jesus Christ. Assuredly he has shown us more favor than he
ever did to the children of Israel. But it might happen to us as it did
to the Romans, who by civil discords of this sort lost little by little
the empire which they had acquired over the world, and fell into the
bondage in which they still remain.
‘We ought to pray God to send us well-instructed and Godfearing men to
administer justice. But if we will treat them with contempt, we shall
by-and-by find no one to serve us. Well may the heart of a citizen ache
when, after laying aside his private affairs to serve the community, he
gets for his reward the censure of those who dread correction and will
not obey the lawful authorities.
‘Come then, gentlemen, one after the other, peaceably to give your
opinion, _yes_ or _no_, in order that all things may be done well and
orderly, to the glory of God and our own great benefit.’[546]
One might have expected that, after this declaration, the leaders of
the opposition, De Chapeaurouge and his adherents, would state in
due form their alleged grievances. They remained silent. This was an
acknowledgment that their accusation was unfounded. They would have
found it difficult to assert that the election of the magistrates had
been due to the intrigues of a few individuals, in the presence of the
people who had themselves made that election freely and honorably.
Moreover, ten weeks only had to elapse before the regular renewal of
the council; and the opposition did not think that they ought to unmask
their batteries so long beforehand. It would be better to employ the
time in preparing the change which they wished to bring about. Thus,
therefore, after the address of the syndics there was a long silence.
After some time De Chapeaurouge rose; but instead of speaking as a
tribune who seeks to draw the people after him, he made a remark on
acoustics; ‘We cannot hear well,’ said he, ‘the place gives a dull
sound.’ There are none so deaf as those who will not hear. In fact, the
chief of the opposition pretended that the challenge and invitation
of the council had not reached his ears, and that this excused his
making a reply. ‘Is a second reading desired?’ said the first syndic;
no one demanded it. As the leaders were silent, the youngest and most
blustering of their followers began to speak. The opportunity was too
tempting not to cry out, and instead of the great piece which was
looked for, a little one was produced. Men destitute of culture and
acquirements attacked the chief magistrates. One man, who had just
come out of prison, flung in the face of the reformers the most absurd
accusations. There was an ebullition in the assembly; a tempest in a
teacup. The young people caused this first outbreak of excitement,
which they show in their pursuit of pleasure and which they easily
transfer to public affairs. Claude Sérais, a tailor, one of those
who in February had played at _Picca-Porral_, came forward and laid
a complaint against Ami Perrin, who enjoyed great respect. It was he
who had accompanied Farel the first time that he preached (in 1534)
in the convent of Rive. He had not heartily embraced the Reformation,
but he was still associated with the reformers. ‘Perrin,’ said Sérais,
‘said that there are traitors at Geneva, people who speak ill of the
preachers. He said that Porral was a good man.’ As Porral was a great
friend of the Reformation, he was at least as hateful to these people
as Farel and Calvin. ‘I replied to him,’ said Sérais, ‘that if he were
so, he had no occasion to bring Farel to the prison, to preach to
us as if we were thieves who were to be prepared for death.’ ‘Yes,’
cried one of those who had been in prison with Sérais, Jacques Pattu,
‘yes, they brought Farel to prison and he told us that he would sooner
drink a glass of blood than drink with us.’ Scarcely had he let fall
these strange words, when Pierre Butini mounted on a bench and cried
out, ‘The franchise has been taken from us by the Porrets (Porral’s
friends), for we were seized, many good men, without informations and
without plaintiffs.’--‘I complain,’ resumed Pattu, ‘that they gave me
the halter without cause,’--‘I complain,’ said Sérais, further, ‘that
Claude Bernard told me that I would not go to hear Farel preach.’--‘Let
the others speak now!’ cried Baudichon de la Maisonneuve, annoyed at
Sérais beginning over again. But the friends of Sérais cried, ‘And we,
we will have Baudichon hold his tongue.’ Then Etienne Dadaz, resuming
the series of grievances, said, ‘I complain that I have been sent to
prison and accused of meaning to sell the town.’--‘Thou oughtest to be
silent,’ said the syndic Goutaz, ‘for thou hast brought from France
articles designed to make us subjects of the king.’ On which Dadaz
replied, ‘It is not I who made them, it is M. de Langey who gave them
me.’ This was certainly not justifying himself, for Langey was a
minister to the king.[547]
[Sidenote: CONFUSED COMPLAINTS.]
The most reasonable of the leaders saw that they must put a stop to
these turbulent complainings, which were ruining their interests. The
former syndic, Jean Philippe, a friend of freedom and courageous, but
also rash and leading a loose life, began to speak, and, addressing
the secretary of the council, Rozet, accused him of having caused the
confession to be sworn which he declared he had not sworn. This was not
escaping from the question, but plunging into it. This was the master
grievance of the opposition, and the matter to be investigated. ‘We
did ill to swear it,’ said Jean Lullin. ‘The ambassadors of Berne have
told us that we were perjured.’ De Chapeaurouge himself, who at first
had kept silence, getting enraged with the secretary of the council,
Rozet, who had caused the confession to be sworn, accused him of being
‘a witness of Susanna’ (that is to say, a false witness). ‘Gentlemen,’
said the respectable Rozet, with much feeling, ‘I have served you
long, and I have neither done wickedly nor borne false witness; and
here is De Chapeaurouge making me out to be a _witness of Susanna_!’
Chapeaurouge replied, ‘You told me, before the syndic Curtet, that
you had no conscience at all.’ Curtet answered, ‘I never heard that;’
and everyone began to laugh. Jean Philippe, a clever man, then made a
proposition which he thought likely to satisfy the opponents. He wished
to place the syndics under guardianship. ‘Gentlemen,’ he said, ‘it
would be a long task to listen in this place to all these plaintiffs
and to provide for them. It seems to me better that we should
choose, in general council, twenty-five men.’ These were twenty-five
superintendents whom he wished to set over the syndics and the council,
as representatives of the people. ‘That done,’ continued Philippe,
‘these gentlemen will hold their Little and Great Councils, and the
plaintiffs shall be heard before all.’ Naturally, Philippe wished
these twenty-five to be of his party. The syndics understood and were
indignant. ‘Do you mean, then,’ said they, ‘to have men set over us?’
The crafty Philippe did not lose the thread. ‘Not _men_ over you,’ he
said, ‘but the general council is over all.’ Then, like a very tribune,
he turned boldly to the people. ‘Gentlemen,’ said he, ‘do you not
intend that the general council should be supreme over all?’ Instantly
the cry was heard from all sides, ‘Yes, yes!’ The opposition succeeding
thus in getting the people on their side, the days of the party in
power were numbered. The syndics hastened to cut short. ‘Now then,’
said the syndic Curtet, let us talk of business.’[548]
It then occurred to them that the general council had to appoint
deputies to go to Berne. The three leaders of the opposition, Jean
Philippe, Ami de Chapeaurouge and Jean Lullin, were proposed by the
council itself, which would much rather see them at Berne, where
they might support the cause of the republic, than at Geneva, where
they were making war on the government. But the three opponents saw
through the trick. ‘For my part,’ said Lullin, ‘I have an excuse
which prevents my going.’ ‘I hold to what was decreed,’ said Philippe,
‘that those who have begun the business should go thither to complete
it.’--‘I say the same,’ added De Chapeaurouge. The three conspirators
(if we may give them such a name) will therefore spend the winter at
Geneva, and they will not be idle there.
[Sidenote: VINDICATION OF THE REFORMERS.]
The angry recriminations, the rash charges, and the turbulent movements
of this council came to the ears of the reformers, and the report
gave them much pain. The next day therefore, November 26, when the
Council of the Two Hundred assembled, Farel and Calvin appeared before
them. The former said, ‘Sérais accuses me of having said that rather
than drink with him, I would drink a glass of _his_ blood. Now what
really passed was this. One of them having said to me, You wish us
no good, I answered, I wish you so much harm that I would willingly
_shed my blood for you_.’ Then coming to the essential point; ‘I have
heard,’ continued Farel, ‘that they call those _perjurers_ who have
sworn the confession. If you examine carefully its contents, you will
find that it is made in conformity with God’s Word, and is adapted to
unite the people. You have not sworn to anything else than to hold
fast faith in God, and to believe in his commandments.’ One of the
members said, ‘It is not we, it is the deputies from Berne who spoke
of perjury.’--‘We should very much like to know when they did so,’
replied Farel, astonished. ‘They spoke of it at table, in the presence
of people,’ said the syndics Curtet and Lullin. ‘We offer to maintain
this confession at the cost of our lives,’ replied the reformers. The
syndics, beginning to fear lest the murmurs of the people should be
excited, entreated the preachers to be careful that this business might
end well.
The discovery that the lords of Berne blamed them in the affair of the
confession was a very heavy blow to the reformers. If that powerful
city should unite with the party of the opposition, the Reformation
would be in great danger. They were not long in finding that their
fears were not unfounded. The Bernese, who intended to act as if they
had the superintendence of the Church of Geneva, wrote to Farel and
Calvin--‘It has come to our knowledge that you, Calvin, have written to
certain Frenchmen at Basel that your confession has been approved by
our congregation, and that our preachers have ratified it, which will
not be proven (_ne constera pas_). On the contrary, it is you and Farel
who have been consenting parties to sign our confession made at Basel,
and to hold to it. We are amazed that you should attempt to contravene
it. We pray you to desist from the attempt, otherwise we shall be
compelled to have resource to other remedies.’[549]
It was supposed at Berne that the two confessions differed, while in
fact they were fundamentally the same; and the lords of that city
believed that if Geneva had a confession of her own, their ascendancy
would be risked. That young Frenchman, who had arrived only the year
before, had a soul, as they thought, too independent. He was ready to
break the ties which bound Geneva to the Swiss Churches. Calvin saw how
matters stood. He felt that it was necessary to enlighten the Bernese
about the confession of Geneva, and therefore set out immediately with
Farel for Berne. The two reformers represented to the council that the
confession which they had prepared, so far from making them perjurers,
confirmed the confession of Basel. At the same time they presented it
to the Bernese senate. That body had it examined, and it was pronounced
to be very good. ‘We are going to send ambassadors,’ said the Bernese
lords, ‘and they will declare to your general council that the words
spoken by our deputies were not uttered in our name.’ The satisfaction
made was brilliant. The reformers had gained their cause.[550] They
returned to Geneva without delay; and having been received, December
10, in the ordinary council, they communicated to it the happy issue of
their journey.[551] But there were at Berne certain persons who desired
to see the Church of Geneva placed in subordination to that of Berne.
The projected embassy might baffle their schemes, and they resolved to
prevent it. For that purpose they did not shrink even from blackening
the reformers. They asserted that the Genevese preachers had said in
their sermons that _all the mischief_ came from Germany! (that is to
say, from German Switzerland, from Berne). The Bernese changed their
mind, and wrote to Geneva, ‘that they would not send ambassadors.’[552]
[Sidenote: THEIR VINDICATION AT BERNE.]
Calvin and Farel were struck with astonishment. The letter from Berne
had arrived on December 13. On the morning of the 14th they went to
the council and asked that the Two Hundred might be convoked for
the afternoon. Before that assembly they repeated that after having
heard them, the Bernese magistrates had declared that ‘the thing (the
confession) had been well done.’ As to the charge of having said
that _all the mischief came from Germany_, they pointed out, that as
ambassadors were about to be sent to Berne, they ought to be instructed
to ascertain who it was that had reported such things. The council
determined that Farel himself should go to Berne with the ambassadors,
and should make inquiry.[553]
The deputies of Geneva, charged with the defence before the Bernese
government, of certain interests of state, were Claude Savoye,
Michel Sept, Claude Rozet, secretary of the council and father of
the chronicler; all of them true friends of the reformers and the
magistrates; and Jean Lullin, who had at last consented to form part
of the embassy, and who was the only member of the opposition.[554]
They went to Berne with Farel; and the latter having given satisfactory
explanations, the Bernese magistrates wrote, December 22, to Geneva,
‘that they and their preachers had found the Genevese confession to
be according to God’s will and the Holy Scriptures, and thereby in
conformity with their own religion.’ They added, ‘Set then these
matters in good order. May dissensions cease, and may the sinister
intrigues of the wicked be confounded.’[555]
Would the passions which actuated one part of the Genevese people allow
them to follow such good counsel? They were not to wait long for an
answer to this question.